Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "Hi"

Hi everyone in "Norton Land". I just became a Norton owner again; I bought a 1962 Dominator 88 SS.
I owned a 1974 Norton Commando 850 Roadster for about 25 years, (and a 1967 A65 BSA Thunderbolt for 20 years).
I loved my Commando to bits. It was in perfect condition; it looked like the day it rolled off the factory floor, right down to the balance pipe exhaust manifolds that most seem to throw away. (Though the Boyer Brandsden ignition was a worthwhile invisible upgrade).
Stupidly I sold my Commando one day (long story) a few years ago. Woke that night, and many others after, in a sweat, thinking, "why the hell did I do that?". And one of my four children loved the bike too; it should have become his.
So, a few months ago I started looking for another Commando like I once had. What a huge disappointment. Every one I saw (so far) was messed about, ropey and totally unappealing.
Purely by good fortune in my searching I was offered this 500 Dommie ten days ago. I bought it on the spot based just on the photos and a bit of hurried research regarding the bike and its owner.

Two questions for you Norton experts please.
1) I'd happily load some photos of my new bike to show you if someone could "walk me through" how to do this. When I click "Img" I just get a pair of brackets. (I'm no computer and forum whizz).
2) It turns out my bike is not a "matching numbers" bike. It looks to me like the engine is 1961 production, and the frame, 1962. At first this disappointed, but now I'm thinking this might be a very good thing, cause I now don't have to obsess about keeping things original. Why not in that case build a 650SS? How practical would it be to source a 650 crankshaft, barrel, rods, and pistons and change them over. The head already is a 650 SS type. Add a set of FAG Superblend crank bearings too. Or are the crankcases on a late 500 like mine still different to a 650 engine and is the project impractical?
Thanks everyone

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

Norton 650ss spec;
Bore x Stroke 68 X 89 mm

Norton 500ss spec;
66.0 mm × 72.6

Go figure :!:

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

The 88SS is a very rare bike and valuable. Not many made or sold. The 88 motor is very reliable and can be tuned to be a fast ,smooth revvy machine. The head you have would not normally come with that year which would have had the earlier head and splayed manifold . A very pretty bike often in two tone green/dove grey and painted guards. If the Motor is a genuine SS then it would make little difference to me that the frame was a year later. You could also build it to look like the later 88SS which shared the look of the 650SS. With cutting and welding and lots of hard to find parts its possible to build it into a 650 but what a crime. 88 barrels in good nick are rarer than hens teeth !!.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

norton bob said:

The 88SS is a very rare bike and valuable. Not many made or sold. The 88 motor is very reliable and can be tuned to be a fast ,smooth revvy machine. The head you have would not normally come with that year which would have had the earlier head and splayed manifold . A very pretty bike often in two tone green/dove grey and painted guards. If the Motor is a genuine SS then it would make little difference to me that the frame was a year later. You could also build it to look like the later 88SS which shared the look of the 650SS. With cutting and welding and lots of hard to find parts its possible to build it into a 650 but what a crime. 88 barrels in good nick are rarer than hens teeth !!.

Click to expand...

Thanks so much for your comments Bob. Much appreciated, and as of today I now agree with you completely!
Between rain in these parts and work, today was my first opportunity to ride my 88SS. (It was so wet here over the weekend that I had to drag the bogged van that delivered my bike out with my tractor on Sunday!)
What a cracking little bike! I love the thing to bits! It corners incredibly steadily (it feels much more secure than my Commando did), feels very responsive and, for a 500 of the period, it goes great. Far better than I'd have thought a relatively heavy 500 would. It's crisp in its performance, revs out very eagerly, yet idles steadily. I couldn't really ask for any more.

A few things about the bike:
As I'd mentioned, I was told by the previous owner the head is a 650SS head (though in the 1963 brochure I've just bought the 88SS head looks (at least superficially) the same, complete with the same angled downdraft carburettors). It's been fitted with an inlet manifold for a single carburettor and is fitted with an Amal Concentric 928.
I'm told the compression ratio was brought up to 10.5:1.
The camshaft is supposedly a 650SS also. What that truly means I don't currently know. ( just a regrind maybe? )
The bike has been fitted with an early Commando twin leading shoe front brake.
CDI ignition
The motor looks to be a genuine 88SS. This is stamped into the rear of the top left of the crankcase. The stamping looks genuine, matching the other digits stamped into the crankcase.
The tank and guards are painted Norton Polychromatic Silver, not two tone.

I hadn't appreciated that the 88SS is relatively rare. But now I've discovered that this is such a lovely little bike, I now intend to leave it pretty much as it is!

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

With a couple of monoblocks 1 1/16 size you will gain some performance at high revs, 7000 is not abusing this motor. The 650 cam and head were std in later years , With the cam properly dialed in the bike will fly . 10.5 is a high comp but workable with 100 + octane .

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

/quote] A few things about the bike:
As I'd mentioned, I was told by the previous owner the head is a 650SS head
The tank and guards are painted Norton Polychromatic Silver, not two tone.![/quote]

as you will appreciate my earlier reply, the bore of the 500 is only 2 mm smaller than a 650-whether Norton supplied a smaller diameter head ( on the spigot) for the 500 or the same for a 650 I don’t know, this is the bike I wanted when I first started looking for a Norton many moons ago –you are very lucky you have one.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

There is a photo posting sticky thread in the main forum first section, right at the top (2nd thread, maybe)

You need a photo hosting site (picturetrail, photobucket, flikr, whatever)

copy and paste each photo's htlm code in between the

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

The 99 and 88 used the same head , the 99 and 650 barrels were interchangeable so the 650 head fits the 99, seems logical that it would also fit the 88.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

Thanks "grandpaul", I'll have a go at posting photos through next week.

"Bernhard" I appreciated that the bore increase from the 500 to the 600/650 was small. just 2mm in diameter. Indeed I was told by my bike's previous owner he'd already over-bored the barrels to bring the capacity to 520cc. When I crunched the numbers, this wasn't too short of the 600/650 bore size anyway. My question really related to firstly whether my crankcases would accommodate the longer throw 650 crankshaft, and secondly whether the 650 barrel would fit the 88SS crankcases, knowing that not all the barrels are interchangeable with all crankcases. I don't believe the 750 barrel for example would fit.

But all this has become academic now. I'm extremely pleased with how my 500 performs, and I'm happy to now to keep it as the lovely lively little bike that it already is.

And for more performance (plus nostalgia) I am still on the lookout for a Commando Mk2 like I had before. One day I'll find what I'm after. Plus I have a modern big bike for long distance touring too.

I even like the simplicity of the single carburettor "norton bob" though I "hear" your comments regarding some top end breathing loss. I do intend to fit a tachometer. The motor currently seems to spin out very well, but the tachometer will help me gauge just how well. It certainly seems to rev surprisingly willingly now, but of course I don't know exactly how high.
I've sourced an original Norton tacho drive for the blanked off timing cover (off an early 750 Fastback Commando) and a drive cable.
The Indian reproduction tachometers advertised on eBay seem to have metric fittings on the instrument end, so I'll need either to get a custom made tachometer drive cable to suit, or, explore a suitable electronic period looking tachometer. Any of you guys have any advice in this regard? The genuine period-original Smiths Chronometric tachometers seem to go for huge amounts of money.

Thanks to all for all the gems of advice.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

MGB65B said:

Thanks "grandpaul", I'll have a go at posting photos through next week.

"Bernhard" I appreciated that the bore increase from the 500 to the 600/650 was small. just 2mm in diameter. Indeed I was told by my bike's

I even like the simplicity of the single carburettor "norton bob" though I "hear" your comments regarding some top end breathing loss. I do intend to fit a tachometer. The motor currently seems to spin out very well, but the tachometer will help me gauge just how well. It certainly seems to rev surprisingly willingly now, but of course I don't know exactly how high.
I've sourced an original Norton tacho drive for the blanked off timing cover (off an early 750 Fastback Commando) and a drive cable.
The Indian reproduction tachometers advertised on eBay seem to have metric fittings on the instrument end, so I'll need either to get a custom made tachometer drive cable to suit, or, explore a suitable electronic period looking tachometer. Any of you guys have any advice in this regard? The genuine period-original Smiths Chronometric tachometers seem to go for huge amounts of money.
Thanks to all for all the gems of advice.

Click to expand...

The so called “Indian Chronometric tachometers “ are NOT identical to the Smiths Chronometric tachometers NOR are they “Chronometric “

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

MGB
hi
sounds like you have a project bike similar to what I am trying to build , a 1962 88SS . While I freely admit mine is a forgery, that is of little concern to me. Mine started as a plain jane 1959 88. 1963 atlas rolling chassis. Here is what I have researched and this is my findings if not flawed is some way.
heads
These are all small bolt pattern heads, see some of this here about small, medium and large bolt pattern heads: http://atlanticgreen.com/nhth.htm
The 61 88ss used the 20 degree exhaust head same as a 99ss. Head R12-2-135 1.3" intake valves and not down draft EDIT correction Sorry this is a 1.4" inlet valve head with 1.625" stud spacing (to help accomodate the dual carb "slab/splayed" manifold for early 88SS and all 99SS

In 61 there was the Manxman (to become 650ss)...also In 62 the 88ss and 650ss used this R650-136 head 1.4" intake valves and 40 degree exhaust ports. The 88SS also used the 22729 cam know as SS, used in the 650SS and atlas, with a change of core at 20M3S, the profile grind lasted until the 1975-850

The main reason you will probably never turn a 500 into a 650 is that the 650 basically uses a 750 atlas style crank (with flywheel mods) AND bottom end cases, same castings from the atlas however machined for small bolt pattern barrels. this makes it a one (650) engine version that is almost not interchangable with any other NHT (Norton Heavy Twin) components. Not counting some low production hybrids.

For quite a while I asked many early norton guru's about the 88SS crank being an upgraded item and got little credible feedback. Ben Gradler is the only one to have data to support the late upgraded 88SS crank theory. So my advise is DO NOT flog this engine. I certainly will not beat mine like a race bike. I have another few bike I can go over 140MPH if I want to go fast. I already blew up my first noton at over 100MPH and don't want to do that again. :mrgreen:

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

Hi Dave, At sometime in the production run the 88ss crank was altered by reducing the hollow core area to make it stronger,I will do some research to see if I can determine when. Sadly lots of factory info was skipped when production moved to AMC 62/3 . I used to run a std 60 88 that was fitted with SS cam and 650 carbs . This bike was ridden every day for some years lots of runs of 60 miles flatout and also 200mile runs at over 80 mph . It used to be road raced against 650's all the time and was never left behind .Several times it was chased over 20 miles by cops on 650 triumphs ,they would not believe it was a 500 . I used to rev it to 7000 regularly and it only nipped up once due to overheating behind a fairing at 95 close tailing a mates 4.2 liter jag for many miles, He said he had got up to 120 at one point ,I figure more like 110 , I was expecting to blow up the motor at any point.It is a much better motor than the 99 which I would not treat the same way. I was once talking with Harold Daniel who told me it was the best motor ever made by Norton.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

OK, here's some photos one of my sons just help me load up. I hope they come out for you to see. The photos must have been taken immediately after the bike was restored about three years ago, as cosmetically it's not as nice as the photos would suggest.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

A very nice usable bike. The exhaust pipes would have orriginally fitted the non DD head and have been bent to fit the wider angle head. The late SS pipies were a bit more angular but I prefer the curved look anyway. The rear mudguard looks a bit different but again better than some other non std ones I have seen . Get out on it!!!!.

Re: 88SS head?

The head on your bike looks like the very late 06-0380 core as used on some 650 mercury circa 1968 :?:
yours appears to have the unmachined commando side entrance oiler boss .
http://atlanticgreen.com/images/mercs.jpg

Rather than the normal early picket fence profile between the rocker shaft covers...
CORRECTED link http://atlanticgreen.com/images/650sss.jpg

or do I not see it correctly
Also would wonder then if it is a low or high pressure oiler head?

Re: 88SS head?

dynodave said:

The head on your bike looks like the very late 06-0380 core as used on some 650 mercury circa 1968 :?:
yours appears to have the unmachined commando side entrance oiler boss .
http://atlanticgreen.com/images/mercs.jpg

Rather than the normal early picket fence profile between the rocker shaft covers...
http://atlanticgreen.com/images/22707slg.jpg

or do I not see it correctly
Also would wonder then if it is a low or high pressure oiler head?

Click to expand...

Hi Dave. Thanks for your interest.
I've looked through your photos, and it appears you are absolutely correct; my head matches your photos of the Norton Mercury head!

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

A couple of photos I took tonight. Looks like it could already use a clean up and fresh spindle cover gaskets.
The head certainly looks like the Mercury head shown on David Comeau's site, doesn't it?
Incidentally the previous owner also said he'd fitted the later oil pump drive gear to double the pump speed and raise the oil pressure. I've no idea if he modified the oil ways to suit the higher flow.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

Its usually a mistake to double up the pump speed. If the rods are not drilled and good oil control rings fitted then the flow will just drown the timing side with blow off. The head will get too much oil and leak and pour down the guides and the pump wear itself out fast. And the ignition will get more oil than it needs thro the mag seal. The breather will also have trouble coping. Norton at birmingham Knew what they were about. It may be worth trying it for a while to see if all the additional work has been done.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

AZtlas Engine from mid 1966 had bigger oil block when fitted with double speed pump als crankcases where dilled out bigger from oil block.

Re: Previous Norton owner "newbie" from Australia, saying "H

norton bob said:

Its usually a mistake to double up the pump speed. If the rods are not drilled and good oil control rings fitted then the flow will just drown the timing side with blow off. The head will get too much oil and leak and pour down the guides and the pump wear itself out fast. And the ignition will get more oil than it needs thro the mag seal. The breather will also have trouble coping. Norton at birmingham Knew what they were about. It may be worth trying it for a while to see if all the additional work has been done.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your comment; I agree completely.
I felt unhappy too when told that the oil pump had been geared up.

I've seen repeatedly in my 50 odd years of MG car experiences where amateur backyard "experts" impose "improvements" on the original designs that the outcomes are usually counter-productive.
The original full time professional engineers at these car and bike factories knew and understood their game well. They had ample opportunities to trial and develop these machines, with, despite the well known financially induced factory limitations, very good facilities, far in excess of the casual mechanic's, to put design refinements to the test.

I'd wondered if the oil seepage past the rocker spindle covers seen in the photos above might not at least partly be a result of my "improved" oil pump. Certainly my Commando never exhibited this tendency.